Tongan royalty – Evening Report

King’s move takes Tonga back to the ‘dark ages’ – democracy editor

Asia Pacific Report — Tue, 26 Mar 2024 08:17:55 +0000

The involvement in Tonga’s government by King Tupou VI is a return to the “dark ages” for the kingdom, a long time journalist, author and advocate campaigning for democracy.

The King last month withdrew his support for the ministers holding two portfolios.

Tonga’s Prime Minister Hu’akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni has reportedly stepped down from his defence portfolio, with Foreign Affairs Minister Fekita ‘Utoikamanu reportedly doing the same.

Sources in Nuku’alofa have told RNZ Pacific the decision to resign comes following a meeting between Hu’akavameiliku and a cabinet team held with King Tupou VI earlier this month.

Democracy advocate and journalist Kalafi Moala, who is editor of Talanoa ‘o Tonga and the RNZ Pacific correspondent, said the King’s decision to withdraw support is a retrograde step.

“The reform in 2010 was that he [the King] would get out of trying to run the government or to appoint government,” he said.

‘Very bad move’
“And with this King, to me, this is a very, very bad move, and there is a lot of public unhappiness about it.”

Hu’akavameiliku has reportedly sent a proposal to the King, recommending that Crown Prince Tupouto’a ‘Ulukalala, a senior official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, be appointed Minister of Defence and Foreign Affairs.

An official announcement is expected to be made after a Privy Council meeting that will be chaired by the King on Thursday.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

‘We can’t control the demons’ – Tonga mulls Facebook ban

Asia Pacific Report — Wed, 14 Aug 2019 05:15:56 +0000

By RNZ Pacific

Tonga is mulling a Facebook ban as the Kingdom struggles to contain a torrent of online abuse and threats on the platform directed at the monarchy by pro-government forces.

It’s the latest fallout in an escalating digital war between the pro-democracy camp and those firmly backing Tonga’s constitutional monarchy, which bestows the King with key political assets.

A new set of proposed laws which will remove some of the King’s powers and place them in the government’s hands has drawn ire from the royals’ camp, spilling onto combative Facebook pages.

Observers say both sides have mobilised thousands of mostly anonymous Facebook accounts to launch attacks on opponents and push political messaging.

Tensions escalated this month when a number of violent threats were made toward the King and his daughter, prompting Police Minister Mateni Tapueluelu to tell the state broadcaster he was considering blocking Facebook to quell the unrest. Prime Minister ‘Akilisi Pohiva later confirmed a working group had been given two weeks to find a solution.

– Partner –

“It’s not an attack on Facebook or media, but it’s just that they (government) have come to realise that we cannot hold fake identity responsible, there’s no law applied to this kind of platform,” said internet provider Tonga Cable director Paula Piukala in an interview.

The state-owned company is part of the multi-agency working group set up by the government in response to the Facebook abuse.

“We can’t control the world of the demons,” Mr Piukala said.

In Tonga, the Pacific’s last monarchy, criticism of the royal family is shunned publicly but has long been lobbed behind closed doors.

Still, experts said critics and online trolls have recently been emboldened by Facebook-enabled anonymity and an increasingly polarised political environment.

It comes as the government attempts to push through six controversial bills, which would edge Tonga closer toward a fully-fledged democracy, undermining a centuries-old grip by the kingdom’s monarchs. A bid earlier this year to rush the laws into force was stymied and they are still before parliament.

Since then, an online battleground has emerged between democracy supporters and those of the monarchy.

In his interview with the Tonga Broadcasting Commission on August 7, Tapueluelu said it was disappointing Facebook had been used to attack the King and royal family.

But missing from his comments was that his wife, who is the Prime Minister’s daughter, had been accused online as having set up a popular pro-democracy page just days before.

Tapueluelu and his wife have denied the allegations and the page has since been shut down.

“The politicians, government included, they see Facebook as a means to basically advance their thinking, their political campaigns,” said Kalafi Moala, a veteran Tongan journalist.

He said the government was losing its online war against the monarchy and had moved to shut down Facebook in a desperate attempt to save face.

“It’s almost like a drowning man trying to reach out for whatever it is that they need to do to kind of save the day for them.

“If they banned Facebook, something very, very drastic is going to happen in this country,” Moala said, adding that protests would likely follow the move.

In January, Tonga limited access to Facebook – which has around 62,000 users in Tonga – when it lost most of its internet access for 12-days due to a cable break. Businesses found their online operations restricted and residents were unable to reach their families in other countries.

Jope Tarai, an academic who researches social media at the University of the South Pacific in Fiji, said Tonga’s proposed ban was an overreaction.

“It would be very heavy handed if the rest of the majority of active account users in Tonga would have to pay the price for a group that is been accused of being a fake Facebook group,” he said, in reference to the pro-democracy Facebook page which was taken down.

Tonga is the latest in a string of Pacific governments to threaten to ban Facebook over online abuse levied at leaders.

In the past year, Papua New Guinea and Samoa have mooted shutting the platform down, although nothing has been actioned.

Tonga’s working group is also considering asking Facebook to install backdoors on local servers so the government can monitor accounts, said Tonga Cable’s Piukala. The suggestion is unlikely to carry much sway with the social media giant, which has been tightening privacy measures in response to global scrutiny.

“People will be free to write whatever they think and want, but be responsible,” Piukala said.

This article is published under the Pacific Media Centre’s content partnership with Radio New Zealand

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Review of laws passed by Parliament ‘not in Tongan king’s power’

Pacific Media Centre — Fri, 04 May 2018 00:01:20 +0000

King Tupou VI … 2010 Constitution “excludes” the King and Privy Council from “governing” the Kingdom. Image: Linny Folau/Matangi Tonga

By Philip Cass of Kaniva News

The King of Tonga has no right to judge the merits of legislation passed by Parliament, according to a New Zealand constitutional legal expert.

Dr Rodney Harrison said that under the 2010 Constitution, review and evaluation of the merits of legislation passed by the General Assembly did not fall within the scope of the king’s powers of sanction and signature.

Dr Harrison said the king had withheld or deferred his signature from a number of pieces of legislation because it was deemed to be inappropriate or unconstitutional.

He said the new Constitution excluded the King and Privy Council from the role of governing the Kingdom.

He said judgements about whether legislation was constitutional went against the doctrine of the separation of powers and the role and independence of the judiciary.

He said the Royal Assent Order 2011, under which the King and Privy Council purported to act, was therefore invalid.

-Partners-

Dr Harrison was asked to give an opinion on the legality of the Royal Assent Order 2011 by the Prime Minister’s Office.

Real problem
However, Dr Harrison said challenging the validity of the Order in court would not solve the real problem, which was the regular deferral or refusal of royal assent for legislation that had been approved by Parliament.

“The underlying problem is not the legal validity of the Royal Assent Order as such,” Dr Harrison said.

“The underlying problem is the view currently held by His Majesty or at least by the Privy Council and, in particular the Law Lords as His advisors, as to the extent of the King’s power to grant or refuse the Royal Assent conferred by Clause 56 of the Constitution.

“It is that in my respectful opinion erroneous view of the King’s constitutional powers that needs to be addressed, hopefully by reasoned persuasion or if not, by judicial ruling.”

Dr Harrison said the old Tongan constitution made it clear that the three arms of government had to be kept separate as a safeguard for the proper running of the country and the safeguarding of the liberties of its people.

The Royal Assent Order 2010 challenged the underlying assumptions of the Tongan constitution. The Order allowed the King to appoint privy councillors as advisers and a Judicial Committee had also been established by the Privy Council in 2011.

Dr Harrison said any powers and functions conferred on any such committee, must be consistent with the overall scheme of the Constitution and any other statutory or fundamental legal principle.

King’s signature
Clause 41 of the Constitution required that “Acts that have passed the Legislative Assembly” must “bear the King’s signature before they become law”.

He said that under the new Constitution the king did not have complete discretion to refuse to sign an Act that had been passed by the Legislative Assembly.

He said changes to the constitution in 2010 had shifted the balance of power from the king to Parliament. This meant that the king should exercise his veto on legislation only in “truly exceptional circumstances and for compelling reason.”

Problems had arisen because the king had deferred assent to legislation passed by Parliament on the advice of Privy Councillors and the Law Lords appointed by the king to the Judicial Committee.

Dr Harrison said the Law Lords played no specific constitutional role, other than that of providing the King with advice.

They could not be permitted to operate de facto as judicial officers and did not have any constitutional function or role as scrutineers of legislation or the legislative process.

“The most fundamental problem with the Royal Assent Order is that it purports to confer on the Judicial Committee and ultimately the Privy Council power to review Acts duly passed by the Legislative Assembly and ultimately to determine whether each such Act is an ‘appropriate’ or ‘inappropriate’ recipient of the Royal Assent; and whether any such Act is or even may be unconstitutional,” Dr Harrison said.

Merits of legislation
“Under the new Constitution, review and evaluation of the merits of legislation passed by the General Assembly do not fall within the scope of the King’s powers of sanction (and signature).

“The ‘inappropriateness’ assessment falls foul of the new Constitution’s exclusion of the King and Privy Council from the role of governing the Kingdom. The constitutionality assessment does likewise, and in addition offends against the constitutional separation of powers and specifically the role and independence of the judiciary.

“If the assessments which the Royal Assent Order purports to authorise fall outside the constitutional powers of the King Himself, it necessarily follows that they cannot be empowered by means of the Royal Assent Order, as a mere Order in Council purportedly made pursuant to Clause 50(3) of the Constitution. On that basis, the Royal Assent Order must be seen as invalid.”

Dr Harrison said the Royal Assent Order was also invalid because it purported to confer the ultimate power of decision and assessment on the Privy Council, when it was only intended to provide a mechanism for giving advice to the King.

Media academic Dr Philip Cass is an adviser to the Kaniva News website. This article is republished by arrangement.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

King’s second son’s noble rights announced in Tonga Gazette

Pacific Media Centre — Tue, 02 Jan 2018 23:05:09 +0000

Prince Ata … Mormon prince has entitlements gazetted in Tonga. Image: Kaniva News

By Kalino Latu in Auckland

King Tupou VI’s second son is the lawful successor to the hereditary noble title and estate of Ata, it has been announced in the kingdom of Tonga Gazette.

It said Viliami ‘Unuaki-‘o-Tonga Mumui Lalaka-mo e-‘Eiki Tuku’aho was entitled to the hereditary estate belonging “to the title to which he has succeeded together with the rents and profits thereof and all other rights and privileges attached to the title as from 25 September 2006”.

The King’s order comes after he sent former Prime Minister Lord Tu’ivakanō and some royal guards to intervene in a baptism ceremony that would have made Prince Ata a Mormon three years ago.

The prince drew back, but a year later he was baptised as a Mormon in Hawai‘i.

As Kaniva News reported at the time, an unconfirmed report said the King later warned Prince Ata he could have some of his princely privileges revoked if he was baptised into the Mormon church.

It is believed he was the first prince of Tonga to become a Mormon after his aunt, the late Princess ‘Elisiva Fusipala Vaha’i, became the first member of the royal family to join the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the 1980s.

-Partners-

The Tongan constitution does not say that successors’ rights to the throne will be affected by their religious beliefs.

The royal family are members of the Free Wesleyan Church of Tonga.

It was unclear why the announcement was published on November 23, 2017 more than 11 years after the 29-year-old prince was appointed in 2006.

Prince Ata’s estates
Prince Ata is fourth in line to the throne. The noble title was previously held by his father.

In 2006, the palace office announced the late King George V had appointed him to the noble title Ata.

It said the appointment was to be effective from September 25, 2006.

Ata’s hereditary estates are Kolovai in Tongatapu and the island of ‘Atatā, 10 kilometres North-West of Nuku‘alofa.

As Kaniva News reported last year, Prince Ata had joined Mormon church leaders who held the first Sunday prayer service for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on the island of ‘Atatā.

The service marked a milestone in the history of the Mormon church on the island.

In the past they have had to make a 30 minute crossing to Tongatapu, the main island of Tonga, to attend Sunday services and church meetings there.

The Gazette
The announcement by His Majesty’s Lord Privy Seal Tēvita Malolo is published verbatim below.

“In Exercise of the powers conferred by Section 38 of the Land Act, His Majesty King Tupou VI hereby Orders to be published in the Gazette that:

Viliami ‘Unuaki-‘o-Tonga Mumui Lalaka-mo e-‘Eiki Tuku’aho is the lawful successor to the hereditary noble title and estate of: ATA and shall possess and enjoy the hereditary estate appurtenant to the title to which he has succeeded together with the rents and profits thereof and all other rights and privileges attached to the title as from 25 September 2006.”

The Land Act
The relevant provision of the Land Act says:

“King to publish name of lawful successor (1) Upon the death of a holder of an hereditary estate or upon being convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment for more than two years or upon his being certified as insane or imbecile by a medical officer,

His Land Act CAP. 46.02 Section 39 to 2016 Revised Edition Page 25 Majesty shall cause the name of the lawful successor to the title of such holder to be published in the Gazette together with the date of his succession thereto which shall be the day following that on which the death of the holder took place or on which the holder was convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment for more than two years or was certified by a medical officer as insane or imbecile.

25 (2) On a convenient day not more than 6 months after the date of such publication, or, where the lawful successor is on such date a minor, 6 months after the day he attains the age of 21 years, His Majesty shall summon the person so named to appear before him in the Privy Council and there to take the oath of allegiance set out in Schedule VII. (3) The clerk of the Privy Council shall keep a roll of all persons holding hereditary estates.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>